VA House of Delegates reaches new low - HB 1 "personhood amendment" to be voted on tomorrow

post reply Forum Index » Political Discussion
[Post New]02/16/2012 11:42
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:How will this affect the HOV rules? Can I drive on 66 at rush hour by myself if I'm pregnant?


[Post New]02/16/2012 12:10
quote
Anonymous
Make your opposition known:

http://www.naralva.org/in-our-state/personhood.shtml

I have also emailed the Governor as well.
[Post New]02/16/2012 13:19
quote
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
takoma wrote:Concerning the confusion about the amendment, I think the problem is the phrase "pass by", which I understand to mean "table", i.e. not consider. Using the word "pass" certainly invites confusion when in fact the vote defeated the amendment.


Turns out that you are correct. According to this page:

http://legis.virginia.gov/1_cap_class/9-12/9_12_how_bills.html

There are two types of "Pass by" actions and neither one means to "pass". Both basically mean to table. This is the first time I've encountered the term. I was just reading it as "pass".

So, the bill is even more draconian than what I was giving it credit for being.
[Post New]02/16/2012 14:14
quote
Anonymous
jsteele wrote:
takoma wrote:Concerning the confusion about the amendment, I think the problem is the phrase "pass by", which I understand to mean "table", i.e. not consider. Using the word "pass" certainly invites confusion when in fact the vote defeated the amendment.


Turns out that you are correct. According to this page:

http://legis.virginia.gov/1_cap_class/9-12/9_12_how_bills.html

There are two types of "Pass by" actions and neither one means to "pass". Both basically mean to table. This is the first time I've encountered the term. I was just reading it as "pass".

So, the bill is even more draconian than what I was giving it credit for being.


Thanks guys, this clears things up.
*sigh*
[Post New]02/16/2012 14:26
quote
Anonymous
Now that we have a new term, I propose we use it for those times you find yourself responding to another repetition of some point that has already been refuted multiple times, when you know there is nothing that going to convince this poster, yet you don't want to leave the silly message as the last word, just write "Pass by."
[Post New]02/17/2012 09:42
quote
Anonymous
So. Virginia just beat Mississippi for "stupid," eh?

This is why the Founding Fathers actually did *not* intend for everyone to be able to vote--they considered that the general populace wasn't educated or sophisticated enough with the world to be able to manage it with any wisdom. Well, turns out--they were correct again!

With all the Religious Right insisting on home schooling their kids for well over a generation's time now, we have even larger numbers of very poorly educated kids--who've become voting adults. The subjects that fare the poorest in the home-schooled domain are: science, and history. (Both fact-based subject matter. Unsurprising, since the Religious Right has never been terribly big on facts.)

This kicks the Commonwealth back to the nation's earliest days, when witch trials were going on. You know, where an accused could prove her innocence that she was *not* a witch by drowning? (If she didn't drown, clearly she was a witch, because who else who was tied up and submerged could possibly survive it if she weren't a witch? Then she'd just have to be burned.)

Notice that it's the woman who is rather consistentky held criminal here. Doctors, EMTs, medical workers, fertility clinics--all are exempted--but not the woman!

Women's rights have been thrown so far backward this time, it's going to take some effort for us to return and regain our rightful spots on the gameboard. And that was part of the purpose.

There was good reason they coined the saying, "Keep 'em barefoot and pregnant": It wasn't just to maintain the free, on-demand sex--nor to maintain the free housekeeping and babysitting (all good perqs, to be sure)--but also to keep producing the free farmhands and free helpers (no child-labor laws back then, remember)--all a guy had to do was just keep her pregnant and without shoes. A woman wasn't likely to leave behind her little ones, out of love, and whom she'd have to keep in tow and barely make it off the acreage before they'd be slowing to a crawl; and she wasn't going to be able to do it when anemic and exhausted from being "with-child." A further guarantee was that, without shoes, she wouldn't get very far even if she tried.

Have you ever read "The Handmaid's Tale," by Margaret Atwood? Our being turned into breeding cows can't be far off.

This one should be termed the "Lock 'Em Up and Throw Away the Key" bill.

Alright, Virginia women, let's all practice together: "Moooooo!" (Quietly, though--we don't want them to know we can still communicate with each other. They'll remove our larynxes next. So--shhhh!)

The Religious Right has just gotten what this was really designed to do (and let's make no mistake about that being the purpose of crafting this in such a restrictive manner):

Supreme Court, here we come!
[Post New]02/17/2012 10:18
quote
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Anonymous wrote:So. Virginia just beat Mississippi for "stupid," eh?

This is why the Founding Fathers actually did *not* intend for everyone to be able to vote--they considered that the general populace wasn't educated or sophisticated enough with the world to be able to manage it with any wisdom. Well, turns out--they were correct again!



While I generally agree with you that representative government is preferable to a statewide vote being held on every issue, in this specific instance, Mississippi voters rejected the law while Virginia delegates approved it. So, in this case, individual voters showed more wisdom then elected representatives.
[Post New]02/17/2012 10:23
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:So. Virginia just beat Mississippi for "stupid," eh?

This is why the Founding Fathers actually did *not* intend for everyone to be able to vote--they considered that the general populace wasn't educated or sophisticated enough with the world to be able to manage it with any wisdom. Well, turns out--they were correct again!



Can I assume that you feel the same way on gay marriage?
[Post New]02/17/2012 14:33
quote
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Anonymous wrote:Notice that it's the woman who is rather consistentky held criminal here. Doctors, EMTs, medical workers, fertility clinics--all are exempted--but not the woman!

Is that correct? I can't find any exception like that here.

Anonymous wrote:Women's rights have been thrown so far backward this time, it's going to take some effort for us to return and regain our rightful spots on the gameboard. And that was part of the purpose.

I think you've gone the wrong way on the fool/knave determination here. I don't think this is a grand patriarchal conspiracy; it's just more of the idiocy of conforming private and public life to the ambiguous statements in a millennia-old historical novel as interpreted by old men playing dress-up.
[Post New]02/17/2012 17:55
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So. Virginia just beat Mississippi for "stupid," eh?

This is why the Founding Fathers actually did *not* intend for everyone to be able to vote--they considered that the general populace wasn't educated or sophisticated enough with the world to be able to manage it with any wisdom. Well, turns out--they were correct again!



Can I assume that you feel the same way on gay marriage?


Oh but wait, NJ passed gay marriage but Christie vetoed it because... he thinks it should be decided directly by the people.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/17/10437521-nj-gov-christie-vetoes-same-sex-marriage-bill

So you must be horrified that the general populace is being asked to do what the legislature is better suited to accomplish.
post reply Forum Index » Political Discussion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: 

Search   Recent Topics   Hottest Topics